Russia and the Russians: A History

Rating:
Summary: Sporadically organized, but an OK read
Review: Geoffrey Hosking sets out in his "Russia and the Russians" to describe the rise and fall of the most influential empire of our times. Yes, one can call it the most influential, as it has defined the outlook on our world until the middle 1990s. America has defined itself after the second world war to a large extent against Russia and so did the rest of the western world.

Hosking describes Russia in the modern sociological terms, where events happen due to economical or cultural/developmental necessity and not due to personalities. Thi may or may not be true, who am I to judge ?

Though Hosking does not deny the influence of the individual, the impact of the individual ssems to be neglible. Even though this may be correct, the approach robs the yarn of many colorful and also telltale facets. Due to Hoskings book I am now finally aware of who Ivan the Terrible was, but it still defies my imagination why he was called "the terrible" ? On a less "exalted" scale, I would have liked to understand what it meant to be a serf in Russia. Does not literary document comparable to Ulrich Braekers "Der arme Mann in Tockenburg" in Germany exist from which the author could have drawn inspiration ? Who were the Nihilsts and how did they arrive at their beliefs ? What did the assasination of the Czar mean in a European context ? Why was Russia so active in Europeanizing itself when we learn so little about it ?

The final part on the USSR after Chrustchev is fascinating in shedding a new light on many issues which have been important during my politically formative years in the 1970s and 1980s, but to short on fact and pages.

Minor gripes include that many Russian words are used without explanation - though there may have been one, but there is no glossary. What is kustar work ? What is Ulozhenie ?

The book gives the impression of depth by length (I spend an amazing amount of time reading it, much longer than on similar sized books). It leaves a feeling that there is much more to be learned, but it finally leaves the impression that everything said here could have been said on 150 pages.

Rating:
Summary: For historians only
Review: I had expected much from this book. I enjoy learning about Russian history--such a fascinating country! But after several attempts, I put this book back on the shelf, largely unread. It's a good book, I suppose. Certainly the author seems to know his subject inside and out. But for the ordinary reader of history, it demands too much. I agree with earlier reviewers that the narrative is unfocused, with too many untranslated words and phrases. More to the point (or my point) is the absence of personalities here. This is a political history, with little or no discussion of the flesh and blood people involved. So, I'd conclude that if you're a serious student of Russian history who wants a well thought out and serious analysis of Russian history, this book is for you. The rest of us might better appreciate lighter fare such as Lincoln's "The Romanovs." Certainly I did.

Rating:
Summary: Not the best Russian history book available
Review: I may not have taken a course(s) on Russian history recently, but I believe I can tell a good book on Russian history when I read one. And this ain't one of them. Hosking's lack of organization, lack of scholarship in some chapters, and extremely tedious narrative style make this book uncomfortable to read. Some reviewers have suggested that since the history of Russia lacked direction during its course, this trait will inevitably be reflected in any attempt to analyze and chronicle the history of that country. The conclusion of this misguided speculation is that Russian history is difficult to narrate and we should therefore be happy reading what Mr. Hosking has produced for us. Although I agree that the history of Russia is indeed rich and complicated, nevertheless, one only has to look at all of the brilliant works that have been written on the subject in the past to see how well other historians have rendered this complex story in a clear and understandable manner. Examples include "Natasha's Dance" by Figes, "Russia under Western Eyes" by Mahlia, "Lenin's Tomb" by Remnick, and "A History of Russia" by Riasanovsky. I have yet to read a positive review on Hosking's "Russia and the Russians" that did not get mixed up by romanticizing the grandeur and the spectacle of Russian history, instead of focusing on the merits of the book. It makes me wonder whether those positive reviewers actually read the book.

I am no expert on Russian history or culture, although I do consider myself an admirer. Since there are so many outstanding books available on the market that deal with the subject of this unique and mysterious country, I regret spending the time that I did on this three-star wonder. If you are looking for a good first book on Russian history, I would strongly encourage you to look elsewhere.

Rating:
Summary: Not the best Russian history book available
Review: I may not have taken a course(s) on Russian history recently, but I believe I can tell a good book on Russian history when I read one. And this ain't one of them. Hosking's lack of organization, lack of scholarship in some chapters, and extremely tedious narrative style make this book uncomfortable to read. Some reviewers have suggested that since the history of Russia lacked direction during its course, this trait will inevitably be reflected in any attempt to analyze and chronicle the history of that country. The conclusion of this misguided speculation is that Russian history is difficult to narrate and we should therefore be happy reading what Mr. Hosking has produced for us. Although I agree that the history of Russia is indeed rich and complicated, nevertheless, one only has to look at all of the brilliant works that have been written on the subject in the past to see how well other historians have rendered this complex story in a clear and understandable manner. Examples include "Natasha's Dance" by Figes, "Russia under Western Eyes" by Mahlia, "Lenin's Tomb" by Remnick, and "A History of Russia" by Riasanovsky. I have yet to read a positive review on Hosking's "Russia and the Russians" that did not get mixed up by romanticizing the grandeur and the spectacle of Russian history, instead of focusing on the merits of the book. It makes me wonder whether those positive reviewers actually read the book.

I am no expert on Russian history or culture, although I do consider myself an admirer. Since there are so many outstanding books available on the market that deal with the subject of this unique and mysterious country, I regret spending the time that I did on this three-star wonder. If you are looking for a good first book on Russian history, I would strongly encourage you to look elsewhere.

Rating:
Summary: Great Intro to Russia
Review: I read the other reviews and can see where they are coming from. This may not be a book for casual readers unfamiliar with the history of empires. It might be too long and not having enough direction (although I would argue--after reading this book--Russia as a country is really rather a country too big with not much direction as well). Russia is a difficult place to write about and I think the author did a superb job.
(I might have a great advantage coming into reading this book that the other reviewers may not have had: I have taken 4 history classes in the last two years and took a year off from school to specifically studied where the world has come from to be what it is, which meant studying the ancient Mediterranean, Greece, Rome, Britain, America, Spain and other empires. Thus, my focus was on how Russia became an empire and the struggles of maintaining its empire and its rank in the world at the same time.)
I found this book excellent because it gave me a greater understanding of a place I am fascinated by. An empire whose elite are Western-bred; whose inhabitants speak about 200 languages and are a mix of Orthodox and other Christians, Muslims, and secularists; a land covering more mass than any other modern country and which borders the EU, China, Mongolia, Central Asia, Korea, and is a stone throw away from Japan, Iran, Turkey, the USA, Canada; a country that was a recognized superpower competitive with the USA; and a country which is currently recovering and reeling at the same time because of disease, an inadequate welfare state, corruption, mobster rule, economic shock policies, and the after taste of Communism. This country and its people are fascinating and the author does a good job of explaining how Russia came to become an empire and how Russia, once an empire, reacted to the diversity of people, and its strange place in the middle of Euraisia as a glob of mixed people and mixed histories. Russia is still trying to attain progress and western permanence and to aquire an identity. Because Russia is such a diverse empire so unlike the relatively homogeneous American empire, it might be difficult for Americans that are casual readers to fully understand a book of this nature. I hope this review helps to encourage some to try and read this book because I feel it would be well worth it.

Rating:
Summary: Great Intro to Russia
Review: I read the other reviews and can see where they are coming from. This may not be a book for casual readers unfamiliar with the history of empires. It might be too long and not having enough direction (although I would argue--after reading this book--Russia as a country is really rather a country too big with not much direction as well). Russia is a difficult place to write about and I think the author did a superb job.
(I might have a great advantage coming into reading this book that the other reviewers may not have had: I have taken 4 history classes in the last two years and took a year off from school to specifically studied where the world has come from to be what it is, which meant studying the ancient Mediterranean, Greece, Rome, Britain, America, Spain and other empires. Thus, my focus was on how Russia became an empire and the struggles of maintaining its empire and its rank in the world at the same time.)
I found this book excellent because it gave me a greater understanding of a place I am fascinated by. An empire whose elite are Western-bred; whose inhabitants speak about 200 languages and are a mix of Orthodox and other Christians, Muslims, and secularists; a land covering more mass than any other modern country and which borders the EU, China, Mongolia, Central Asia, Korea, and is a stone throw away from Japan, Iran, Turkey, the USA, Canada; a country that was a recognized superpower competitive with the USA; and a country which is currently recovering and reeling at the same time because of disease, an inadequate welfare state, corruption, mobster rule, economic shock policies, and the after taste of Communism. This country and its people are fascinating and the author does a good job of explaining how Russia came to become an empire and how Russia, once an empire, reacted to the diversity of people, and its strange place in the middle of Euraisia as a glob of mixed people and mixed histories. Russia is still trying to attain progress and western permanence and to aquire an identity. Because Russia is such a diverse empire so unlike the relatively homogeneous American empire, it might be difficult for Americans that are casual readers to fully understand a book of this nature. I hope this review helps to encourage some to try and read this book because I feel it would be well worth it.

Rating:
Summary: And OK book
Review: Perhaps the book's biggest flaw is it's length in comparison to its content. My focus was mainly on the contemporary Russia - for it's the period I am more confident of. Regardless, Hosking seems to advocate for some right wing theories regarding the centralization of the Bolshevik state, at times giving some objective insight, and at times taking a personal stance in the issues.

It's not the best Russian history book out there, not close to it. It's perhaps a good approach, a good beginning to understand the foundations of the Russian society and their culture, but I would not regard it as a magnificent work.

Hosking seems to have done his homework. His research shows a lot of work and a lot of dedication. However, I see this book's legacy as a bit dubious, for the target it wants to reach doesn't match with the book's content.

Rating:
Summary: And OK book
Review: Perhaps the book's biggest flaw is it's length in comparison to its content. My focus was mainly on the contemporary Russia - for it's the period I am more confident of. Regardless, Hosking seems to advocate for some right wing theories regarding the centralization of the Bolshevik state, at times giving some objective insight, and at times taking a personal stance in the issues.

It's not the best Russian history book out there, not close to it. It's perhaps a good approach, a good beginning to understand the foundations of the Russian society and their culture, but I would not regard it as a magnificent work.

Hosking seems to have done his homework. His research shows a lot of work and a lot of dedication. However, I see this book's legacy as a bit dubious, for the target it wants to reach doesn't match with the book's content.

Rating:
Summary: A bittersweet read
Review: Regardless of whether you are a scholarly or a casual reader, I would expect that you would find this book difficult to read all the same, albeit perhaps for different reasons. I approached "Russia and the Russians" as a casual reader, and thus I am writing my review from this perspective, in the hope that it may be of benefit to others.

In reading this sweeping history of Russia, I had hoped that the author would have been able to provide an overall "big picture" of how the Russian nation, and perhaps even the Russian character, developed. To his benefit, Hosking actually did begin his book along these lines by discussing Russia's unique geopolitical situation and some of her unique cultural traits. Although he may have tried to follow up on this by explaining how these various geopolitical and cultural issues affected how the Russian people responded to specific historical events at various points in the text, the lack of organization in Hosking's writing still made it quite difficult for me to appreciate how important the geopolitical, cultural, and economic forces were in shaping the course of Russian history.

When I say Hosking's writing lacked organization, I mean that he would at times jump from one discussion to another without any warning or that he would suddenly go back in time to discuss events that happened earlier than what he had previously been focusing on to begin with (again without any warning). Additionally, I thought most of the maps in the book did very little to support what was being discussed in the text (i.e. towns and rivers that were being mentioned in the text were not shown on the maps), which I found to be a nuisance. Although a number of reviewers have criticized this book for its liberal use of Russian words, I think Hosking is justified in this regard since he usually reserves such words to define uniquely Russian concepts. Although this book does not contain a glossary of Russian vocabulary, I found that the index was just as helpful in finding the page where a Russian word was initially defined.

Is "Russia and the Russians" worth reading? In hindsight, despite my mixed feelings, I still feel that my time reading this book was justified. Although there were some parts that were treacherous to read (primarily due to the dry and abstract presentation of the material), there were other parts that I found absolutely delightful (such as Hosking's discussion of cultural movements during the various historical periods).

Bottom line: If you're a serious Russophile, you may be able to overlook the book's shortcomings and still find this an enjoyable read, whereas if you're just looking for entertainment value, you will most likely not find it here.

Rating:
Summary: INTERESTING CONCEPTS - LITTLE FACTUAL EVIDANCE!
Review: With my Russian roots firmly planted, (my Russian-born grandparents immigrated to Canada in 1905 and 1907) I hoped this book would provide more factual historic information on their homeland. While the book did make interesting reading material, there were many statements made that were not supported. Many facts presented seemed to be based solely on personal opinion rather that proven fact, particularly when the author presents his findings on the "legislative weakening of the family" in the 1930's. There were several such assumptions throughout the book that did not appear to be supported by any concrete evidence. There were also a great number of orphans during the 1800's and early 1900's, not just in the 1930's. While civil wars, no doubt, played a major part in creating orphans, there were no proven facts given to support the author's claim there was a "weakening of the family."

To the book's credit, it is quite an extensive historical overview with a great deal of information provided. The author obviously does know the country, it's climate, geography, politics, etc. I just question how well he truly understands the people. There were parts of the book that made for rather dry reading. Given the nature of the book, that is understandable to a certain degree; however, I did find that it was not the information that made for a dull read, but the writing style. History can be a fascinating topic if presented in the right light and supported by proven facts.